I understand people talking about issues, whatever they may be; i was questioning the sheer volume in a case that IMHO was straight forward with respect to guilt or innocence.

Having one cop react in a wrong way should not taint the whole system by people like you

Two things here. One, I am not sure what you mean and Two, what exactly is "people like me"? Who am I in your HO?

If you are suggesting that I believe that the police in general need to dial it back a bit, then yes, you are correct.

I think that by and large, they have become exceedingly heavy handed when it comes to how they deal with people in general during the arrest process.

I am not suggesting that is true in every case but I do see it as becoming more prevalent. They are more than willing to engage violently with suspects when they are in arrest mode and maybe I should have made that distinction in the beginning.

I am an advocate for police though it may not sound like it. I am merely stating that in recent years, something has changed regarding attitudes. I know that they deal with crappy situations every day but that is their job. They chose it and they have to be willing to be held to a higher standard than you or I and I don't see that.

Geoff Mantler is a prime example of that. Just as is Monty Robinson and his partners. They are becoming more pervasive and to me, that is frightening.

You cant paint them all with the same brush. I would say a good 90 some percent of them are great cops and awesome people. One here and there isnt the whole system. I am against abuse in the biggest way and the kick really got me riled even tho lots doesnt but they do not come that way in my opinion, just some might spark over some issues and possibly a very few maybe got into it for the pleasure of the power but They are not of that same mold you see here.I dont know how many cops we have in town but I am betting a bad event isnt seen all that often compared to how many we do have. Across the country there might be a good number of wild guys and gals but you cant see them all as the same unless you actually hate cops.

When I die I want my last words to be, "I left a million dollars under the,,,, gergle, gergle, pfffff,,,,

All I see is just another case of a public servant on taxpayer payrol acting out his macho feelings on a unarmed citizen, and I say this because I don't know if the assaulted citizen is indeed a criminal or not. This public servant will be acquitted, make no mistake about that. The trial is fancy show. This citizen is and will continue to get paid. Its called suspended with pay! As for the assaulted civilian we do not know. I am bothered by two things and one is the term excessive force referring to the kick in the head of said civilian. Does that mean that lesser force kick is perfectly acceptable and desirable??? Heck we had people shot in back of the head (in prison of all places) by public servant, teasered till dead, by swarm of five well built and trained public servants, they feared a stapler.....end result: acquitted of wrong doing The other being the use of that sadistic fashist term imported from the southern neighbours' *noncompliant* I do believe that the term uncooperative was used in not to distant past. So in this case the citizen was being judged as noncompliant and thus a treat so the kick in head was (here is the anther one, Deployed). Eventually public servants like the one in this case do eventually meet the wrong (* or right) person who has no use for courts and will act accordingly be it day later or years latter perhaps with their version of revenge. I know I would, or die trying as I am far from perfect and believe in repaying the due. Some might silently agree with above and will remain so. Other will condemn me, but no one will be neutral and thats a good thing folks.

goldpot501 wrote:All I see is just another case of a public servant on taxpayer payrol acting out his macho feelings on a unarmed citizen, and I say this because I don't know if the assaulted citizen is indeed a criminal or not. This public servant will be acquitted, make no mistake about that. The trial is fancy show. This citizen is and will continue to get paid. Its called suspended with pay! As for the assaulted civilian we do not know. I am bothered by two things and one is the term excessive force referring to the kick in the head of said civilian. Does that mean that lesser force kick is perfectly acceptable and desirable??? Heck we had people shot in back of the head (in prison of all places) by public servant, teasered till dead, by swarm of five well built and trained public servants, they feared a stapler.....end result: acquitted of wrong doing The other being the use of that sadistic fashist term imported from the southern neighbours' *noncompliant* I do believe that the term uncooperative was used in not to distant past. So in this case the citizen was being judged as noncompliant and thus a treat so the kick in head was (here is the anther one, Deployed). Eventually public servants like the one in this case do eventually meet the wrong (* or right) person who has no use for courts and will act accordingly be it day later or years latter perhaps with their version of revenge. I know I would, or die trying as I am far from perfect and believe in repaying the due. Some might silently agree with above and will remain so. Other will condemn me, but no one will be neutral and thats a good thing folks.

I don't agree with the " macho feelings " comment. My take on the whole thing is that Mantler had lots of adrenaline and not enough " real situation " experience. What he did was wrong but in my opinion was a " knee jerk " reaction ( sorry for the pun ). His guilty plea IMO is an indicator that everyone might have reached an agreement.

Words out of your mouth are like bullets out of a gun.Once they are out, you can't take them back.

I think and I said that the police need to respond to all potentially violent calls in worst case mode. That keeps them alive. However, once a situation is under control, do your job and act accordingly and professionally.

There is almost never a need for excessive force to be used once a suspect is on the ground, face down with hands behind their back. Cuff em and take em away and if in the course of cuffing them they resist, that changes the dynamic and the use of force is just and called for and the suspect gets what they deserve.

Perhaps if Mantler had a more robust physical sort of partner with him at the time, one in whom he would trust explicitly with his life, and not feel the need to take charge of the whole situation himself, whilst the more effeminit member attentively watched his impressive display of masculine adroitness from afar, results may have been different.

The entire new approach to law enforecement, lowered expectations, lowered standards including height strength and iq is going to show up somewhere. The female should have been frontline, Mantler the backup, you keep the pitbull on the leash and under control, wreckless endangerment the other way around.. Was only a matter of time for it to happen somewhere sometime if not here ..jmo.

xkite wrote:Perhaps if Mantler had a more robust physical sort of partner with him at the time, one in whom he would trust explicitly with his life, and not feel the need to take charge of the whole situation himself, whilst the more effeminit member attentively watched his impressive display of masculine adroitness from afar, results may have been different.

The entire new approach to law enforecement, lowered expectations, lowered standards including height strength and iq is going to show up somewhere. The female should have been frontline, Mantler the backup, you keep the pitbull on the leash and under control, wreckless endangerment the other way around.. Was only a matter of time for it to happen somewhere sometime if not here ..jmo.

I really doubt that this logic had anything to do with what actually happened....and that is jmo.

The psychology of the situation that led to the incident should be and no doubt will be discussed more behind closed doors than anywhere we will ever hear. What went on in Mantler's mind and why is still open for debate in some circles, the court action was just in regard the ramifications left to the latest victim. Is there a policy problem that is partially to blame for what happened? Put any hot blooded male out there with a female in close enough quarters he feels a need to impress and or defend as part of his job and well, we may see more of this yet. I believe the female constable's husband also an rcmp member came screaming to the scene in rapid response at the same time. That interplay between partners male female/ IQ etc.. husband of the female a trusted colleage to Mantler and he Mantler tasked with keeping her safe and out of harms way.. People are not all the same, RCMP officers are not all the same. Complex for an outsider not knowing all the dynamics at play, individual personalities and capablities of each . .. jmo

I'm actually sticking up for Mantler, I just think he is too dumb to know it wasn't all his fault. Shouldn't have pled out imo. They just stopped it before it spilled over any further or any higher up the chain.

What was the final outcome of Mantler's conviction? What disciplanary action from the RCMP?

"They just stopped it before it spilled over any further or any higher up the chain." Good grief xkite! What is that comment supposed to mean or suggest? Surely you couldn't be thinking that the RCMP somehow was able to order or influence Mantler to change his plea to guilty? And why would he or any other member in his position agree to do such a thing? That would be a case of: "Oh yea.. I will plead guilty and spare you any further embarassment and at the same time provide you with additional ammunition [in the form of a conviction for an indictable offence] that you can use against me during internal disciplinary hearings." This of course would be an expression of appreciation for the RCMP having suspended his pay and withdrawn funding for his lawyer!!!!

xkite wrote:Perhaps if Mantler had a more robust physical sort of partner with him at the time, one in whom he would trust explicitly with his life, and not feel the need to take charge of the whole situation himself, whilst the more effeminit member attentively watched his impressive display of masculine adroitness from afar, results may have been different.

The entire new approach to law enforecement, lowered expectations, lowered standards including height strength and iq is going to show up somewhere. The female should have been frontline, Mantler the backup, you keep the pitbull on the leash and under control, wreckless endangerment the other way around.. Was only a matter of time for it to happen somewhere sometime if not here ..jmo.

I actually looked around when I read this post. Am I being punked ? What is this ? The 1950's.Just plain weird post.